Journal
INVERTEBRATE SYSTEMATICS
Volume 25, Issue 3, Pages 219-253Publisher
CSIRO PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1071/IS10024
Keywords
Bayesian; caddisflies; classification; missing data; morphology; parsimony; systematics
Categories
Funding
- University of Minnesota Graduate School
- University of Minnesota Bell Museum of Natural History
- University of Minnesota Institute for Global Studie
- National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution
- National Science Foundation [0117772]
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Phylogeny of Polycentropodidae Ulmer is inferred based on data from immature and adult stages. Larval information is unknown for 61% of the taxa included in this study. To understand the effects of including characters with large sets of missing data, three alternative datasets were analysed using parsimony and Bayesian methods. Five outgroup taxa, including the four families in Psychomyioidea and the single family in Hydropsychoidea, were used in all datasets. Monophyly of Polycentropodidae, as currently defined, was rejected and the monophyly of the three largest cosmopolitan genera, Polycentropus, Polyplectropus and Nyctiophylax, was not confirmed. Monophyly of Pseudoneureclipsinae, including the genera Antillopsyche and Pseudoneureclipsis, was supported in all analyses. The placement of Pseudoneureclipsis within Dipseudopsidae was rejected. Monophyly of Kambaitipsychinae was supported, but its placement within Polycentropodidae was not confirmed. Analyses were sensitive to either inclusion or exclusion of characters from immature stages. Based on the results of these analyses, the following taxonomic changes are established: Kambaitipsychidae, stat. nov. and Pseudoneureclipsidae, stat. nov. are elevated to family status. North American Polycentropus species originally described in either Plectrocnemia or Holocentropus are returned to their original combinations and North American species described in Polycentropus post-1944 are transferred to either Holocentropus or Plectrocnemia. The following new or reinstated combinations are proposed: Plectrocnemia albipuncta Banks, comb. rev.; Plectrocnemia aureola Banks, comb. rev.; Plectrocnemia cinerea (Hagen), comb. rev.; Plectrocnemia clinei Milne, comb. rev.; Plectrocnemia crassicornis (Walker), comb. rev.; Plectrocnemia jenula (Denning) comb. nov.; Plectrocnemia icula (Ross), comb. nov.; Plectrocnemia nascotia (Ross), comb. nov.; Plectrocnemia remota (Banks), comb. rev.; Plectrocnemia sabulosa (Leonard & Leonard), comb. nov.; Plectrocnemia smithae (Denning), comb. nov.; Plectrocnemia vigilatrix Navas, comb. rev.; Plectrocnemia weedi (Blickle & Morse), comb. nov.; Holocentropus chellus (Denning), comb. nov.; Holocentropus flavus Banks, comb. nov.; Holocentropus glacialis Ross, comb. rev.; Holocentropus grellus Milne, comb. rev.; Holocentropus interruptus Banks, comb. rev.; Holocentropus melanae Ross, comb. rev.; Holocentropus milaca (Etnier), comb. nov.; and Holocentropus picicornis (Stephens), comb. rev.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available